"1) not everyone can afford a mac. It's a premium retail item and priced that way
2) apple doesn't license out their os to everyone and their dog
3) ms relies on ignorance, inertia, and universal licensing. "
1. Please explain to me how 599.00 for a mac mini is out of the price range of the average consumer. For that matter 999.00 for a macbook or even 1199.00 or an imac. What is so premium about those prices? Do you live in a third world country because where i come from people send more then 599.00 eating out in a few weeks.
the only mac apple offers sub-$1000 is the mini. Everything else is $1000 or higher. Apple has virtually nothing in the mid-end and nothing at all oin the low-end. The mid to low end market is much broader. There will be far more consumers in these semgents. The $1000 market is considered the premium end. I dodn't make that up. The industry did. Others in the industry offer $1000+ models as well, but apple, with its $1000+ - only offerings, rules this end. By its very nature, the $1000+ will be limited. It's the top of the retail pyramid, and yes, not everyone will be able to afford a mac at these prices, but among those that can, apple rules this area. Keep in mind that the retail pyramid is much narrower at the top.
2. Yes we all know this. Thanks for commenting on it yet again.
"we" do. But the individual i was replying to earlier didn't seem to.
3. People use windows because it dominates the market. Most of us need to use it to get work done. Most of us use it because its what business has adopted as the standard.
exactly. Ignorance, inertia, apathy.
i would really love for you to tell us how apple most popular systems that cost right around 1000.00 (macbook and macbook pro 13") are so out of the range of the average consumer and so premium. Also explain to me why apple spends most of its time trying to let users know that overall the cost of ownership is actually less expensive then owning a pc yet you contantly spout this garbage.
see above.
As for total cost of ownership. That's lower. But the initial outlay for a mac is on average, higher.
Hey Einstein, changing the name is not that big of a deal. Keeping it is. Everyone got it, why not you?
Like Apple Corp. (The Beatles) vs. Apple Computer, right Einstein?! Apparently not everybody gets it including you and Steve Jobs!
What would be the posts here if Apple Corp said no the pay off from Apple, Inc?
Be thankful a payout won the day. Otherwise, Apple Corp. could of said to Steve Jobs and Apple, "Change the name. It's not that bid of a deal!" Hhmmmm????
Well everyone is swooning over a email from Steve Jobs and here I go and contact him personally about the glossy screen issue and he responds with a 15" matte screen MacBook Pro in like two weeks.
Do I get any press? No.
Do I have proof of contact, yes. (and don't ask because it gives up sensitive info on the guy)
Well work you magic and get Steve working on a damn Matte Screen iMac... Pretty Please....
It's a trademark issue. A big deal in terms of the law. Not a big deal in terms of a dev changing the name in order to avoid legal troubles.
You are right. I guess that is something Steve learned from all the troubles with Apple Corp? Win or loose Apple still had to spend big bucks for Steve's use of someone else's trademarked name.
The guy who wrote the original email is a tool and fanboy with no sense of self worth. He is a hipster who failed at school so instead of trying he dropped out to go to Starbucks everyday, play with iChat and write mac software. I think it's working out for him now
My god, you could not make up your own joke, so stole it from person, who said that to me orginally, even though there are no starbucks in India.
"1) not everyone can afford a mac. It's a premium retail item and priced that way
2) apple doesn't license out their os to everyone and their dog
3) ms relies on ignorance, inertia, and universal licensing. "
1. Please explain to me how 599.00 for a Mac mini is out of the price range of the average consumer. For that matter 999.00 for a MacBook or even 1199.00 or an iMac. What is so premium about those prices? Do you live in a third world country because where I come from people send more then 599.00 eating out in a few weeks.
2. Yes we all know this. Thanks for commenting on it yet again.
3. People use Windows because it dominates the market. Most of us need to use it to get work done. Most of us use it because its what business has adopted as the standard. For someone that is an old XP user you make alot of comments about something you don't even use or know how to use. Its like making of a car you drove 10 years ago. You sound like a retard.
I would really love for you to tell us how Apple most popular systems that cost right around 1000.00 (macbook and macbook pro 13") are so out of the range of the average consumer and so premium. Also explain to me why Apple spends most of its time trying to let users know that overall the cost of ownership is actually less expensive then owning a PC yet you contantly spout this garbage.
firstly I am replying to first number 1, not second number 1......I thought you stated in previous comments that there is no premium market and Apple made that up.
Last number 3, Interesting you say that even though the MS shareholders are not happy with MS 'dominates' the market, i noticed you did not comment in that discussion
*]apple inc. Admitted its error by paying huge sums of green backs to quiet apple corps
*]apple entered the music biz
*]apple corps sued and won again
yet who can say apple or any words can be patented unless they are used to deceive the buying public into buying a mimic product ,
so apple inc. Should have told apple corps to go f itself , it did not for reasons we all know.
Also since apple corps has allowed apple inc. To function for many yrs. With that name apple corps has implied that apple name is ok for apple inc. To use
the same thinking applies to ipodrip
ipodrip existed as function to rip music from ipod to other device hence the accurate name
i p o d r i p... 78 months go by and apple says no go . Yet apple gave no compensation for ipodrip great timely service to apple and apple clients
well the apple corps should sue the ass off of apple inc. For the same reason
facts are facts ,and facts have to applied to both cases equally
apple received great value from the ripping service
apple inc. Could smile at riaa and say were clean and apple worker;s then would direct people to ipodrip .they directed me dude .
Steve jobs of old would have quietly paid a couple of mill to these great kids who truly love apple and moved on
todays steve or todays apple has changed . Apple today smiles a lot less . Apple today has an almost i want to puke>> slickness. I think celebrity playlist w/ 2 bimbo's was my final straw.
*]apple inc. admitted its error by paying huge sums of green backs to quiet apple corps
*]apple entered the music biz
*]apple corps sued and won again
If you wish to use someone’s else’s name then be prepared to have the fight you for it.
Apple is not patented.
There was no “error”. Apple Computers argued that no one could be confused by the two companies because their businesses don’t intersect. At the time that was very true yet they still settled out of court for $80k. 12 years later another settlement for a different issue was settled for $26M.
iPodRip doesn’t exist without the iPod and is directly created to work with an iPod, yet you feel that they should be able to use the name for free without question? Seriously!
Apple Corps sued them again long before they entered the “music biz”. They sued them when Macs got MIDI support. A company needs to defend it’s copyrights and trademarks. Not defending them sets a precedence.
To say Apple Corps sued and won again is erroneous on many levels. The one time it actually went to court and wasn’t just a settlement, Apple Corps lost. Apple tried to pay them $1M to settle, but Apple Corps took it to court claiming it was a breach of contract for using the Apple logo in general even though the store was called iTunes Music Store. Apple Corps lost. The judge said, "“no breach of the trademark agreement had been demonstrated.”
If you have a trademark you have to protect it. If you don’t you set precedence that you don’t care who uses it. You clearly think Apple Corp has a right to protect their trademark but have a problem with Apple Inc. doing the same?
"the only mac apple offers sub-$1000 is the mini. Everything else is $1000 or higher. Apple has virtually nothing in the mid-end and nothing at all oin the low-end. The mid to low end market is much broader. There will be far more consumers in these semgents. The $1000 market is considered the premium end. I dodn't make that up. The industry did. Others in the industry offer $1000+ models as well, but apple, with its $1000+ - only offerings, rules this end. By its very nature, the $1000+ will be limited. It's the top of the retail pyramid, and yes, not everyone will be able to afford a mac at these prices, but among those that can, apple rules this area. Keep in mind that the retail pyramid is much narrower at the top. "
Your first point in your earlier post was most people can not afford a Mac and that simply isn't true. Even if you take out the Mini the Macbook and even the Macbook Pro 13 are easily within most users price range.
"exactly. Ignorance, inertia, apathy."
When someone use the system they need to get a job done I fail to see how that makes them ignorant. In fact 85% of Apple users also use Windows. If yo walk into an Apple store most sales rep will use Bootcamp and the ability to run Windows as a sale pitch. Its okay to like a Mac and prefer to use a Mac but you are so bias to one end anything you say has no merit. If you used Windows and didn't like some feature then at least your opinion would be worth something in this area. Fact is you don't so I'm not sure why you bother bashing something you don't even use.
"As for total cost of ownership. That's lower. But the initial outlay for a mac is on average, higher."
And what I am saying is users will not walk away from a product for a few hundred dollars. That is nothing by todays standards.
firstly I am replying to first number 1, not second number 1......I thought you stated in previous comments that there is no premium market and Apple made that up.
Last number 3, Interesting you say that even though the MS shareholders are not happy with MS 'dominates' the market, i noticed you did not comment in that discussion
I really could care less about MS shareholds seeing I am not one of them. I use a product based on needs not based on an emotional reaction. Also I never stated there is no premium market only that premium is a subjective term. At least if your going to quote me get it right.
If you wish to use someone?s else?s name then be prepared to have the fight you for it.
Apple is not patented.
There was no ?error?. Apple Computers argued that no one could be confused by the two companies because their businesses don?t intersect. At the time that was very true yet they still settled out of court for $80k. 12 years later another settlement for a different issue was settled for $26M.
iPodRip doesn?t exist without the iPod and is directly created to work with an iPod, yet you feel that they should be able to use the name for free without question? Seriously!
Apple Corps sued them again long before they entered the ?music biz?. They sued them when Macs got MIDI support. A company needs to defend it?s copyrights and trademarks. Not defending them sets a precedence.
To say Apple Corps sued and won again is erroneous on many levels. The one time it actually went to court and wasn?t just a settlement, Apple Corps lost. Apple tried to pay them $1M to settle, but Apple Corps took it to court claiming it was a breach of contract for using the Apple logo in general even though the store was called iTunes Music Store. Apple Corps lost. The judge said, "?no breach of the trademark agreement had been demonstrated.?
If you have a trademark you have to protect it. If you don?t you set precedence that you don?t care who uses it. You clearly think Apple Corp has a right to protect their trademark but have a problem with Apple Inc. doing the same?
Here is a decent yet brief synopsis of Apple Computers v. Apple Corps over the years. I?ve looked it over and saw nothing that seemed out of place or erroneous.
Apple did at one time object to one of New York State's Trademarks.
Hey thanks for that- I always appreciate something interesting to read. My favorite line in the article is "Gwyneth Paltrow better rename that kid quick",.
Here is a decent yet brief synopsis of Apple Computers v. Apple Corps over the years. I’ve looked it over and saw nothing that seemed out of place or erroneous.
Based on my reading of the back-and-forth between newbee and teckstud: (i) The attacks seem to go both ways; and (ii) They did not seem unprovoked, in the least (at least, not to me).
Poor teckstud -- he must be quite pleased and relieved to have you, as a fellow New Yorker, stand up for him.
Based on the thousands of postings I've read of his, I think that he seems to be quite content to be dishing it out to everyone else, but has a bit of a thin skin when it comes to being being able to take it. Not unlike a trait I have often seen in my travels to the Big City (which, btw, I happen to think, is the greatest city on earth).
I have a thin skin? Haha. Trust me the personal attacks are much more revealing of the poster than the person being attacked. At least I don't stalk anyone on here, provoke them over and over and post ridiculous comments on their every post. And your whining to the moderators "oh hear my call"- how pathetic is that? Talk about "thin skin".
So now your trying to insult all newyorkers- boohoo. Your probably one of those tourists that gawks at us from your 2 decker bus ride though Manhattan wishing you lived here. And where exactly are you from?
Finally- I thought I was on your ignore list - didn't you get the memo from solipsism. Why are you reading my thousands of posts anyway?
Comments
Unlike your diatribes which go on and on and ............ Zzzzzzzzzzzzzz.
Attention deficit disorder? ... That explains everything.
ofcoruse it doesn't
Some people have no sense of self worth and value hence they become hipsters and "crazy ones"; you know the ones that think different
When you cater to 5% of the market instead of 95% and growing, you already need to have your brain checked out
But hey, there is a sucker born every minute
And which minute are you?
- OMG! I just got an email from Steve Jobs!
- What did it say?
- Change the name.
- and?
- I'm not going to disobey Steve! iRip it is!
All kneel in front of the great Steve Jobs (email)!
I think Steve should personally email all customers complaining to Apple. That'll learn 'em.
That's a good point.
"1) not everyone can afford a mac. It's a premium retail item and priced that way
2) apple doesn't license out their os to everyone and their dog
3) ms relies on ignorance, inertia, and universal licensing. "
1. Please explain to me how 599.00 for a mac mini is out of the price range of the average consumer. For that matter 999.00 for a macbook or even 1199.00 or an imac. What is so premium about those prices? Do you live in a third world country because where i come from people send more then 599.00 eating out in a few weeks.
the only mac apple offers sub-$1000 is the mini. Everything else is $1000 or higher. Apple has virtually nothing in the mid-end and nothing at all oin the low-end. The mid to low end market is much broader. There will be far more consumers in these semgents. The $1000 market is considered the premium end. I dodn't make that up. The industry did. Others in the industry offer $1000+ models as well, but apple, with its $1000+ - only offerings, rules this end. By its very nature, the $1000+ will be limited. It's the top of the retail pyramid, and yes, not everyone will be able to afford a mac at these prices, but among those that can, apple rules this area. Keep in mind that the retail pyramid is much narrower at the top.
2. Yes we all know this. Thanks for commenting on it yet again.
"we" do. But the individual i was replying to earlier didn't seem to.
3. People use windows because it dominates the market. Most of us need to use it to get work done. Most of us use it because its what business has adopted as the standard.
exactly. Ignorance, inertia, apathy.
i would really love for you to tell us how apple most popular systems that cost right around 1000.00 (macbook and macbook pro 13") are so out of the range of the average consumer and so premium. Also explain to me why apple spends most of its time trying to let users know that overall the cost of ownership is actually less expensive then owning a pc yet you contantly spout this garbage.
see above.
As for total cost of ownership. That's lower. But the initial outlay for a mac is on average, higher.
Hey Einstein, changing the name is not that big of a deal. Keeping it is. Everyone got it, why not you?
Like Apple Corp. (The Beatles) vs. Apple Computer, right Einstein?! Apparently not everybody gets it including you and Steve Jobs!
What would be the posts here if Apple Corp said no the pay off from Apple, Inc?
Be thankful a payout won the day. Otherwise, Apple Corp. could of said to Steve Jobs and Apple, "Change the name. It's not that bid of a deal!" Hhmmmm????
Well everyone is swooning over a email from Steve Jobs and here I go and contact him personally about the glossy screen issue and he responds with a 15" matte screen MacBook Pro in like two weeks.
Do I get any press? No.
Do I have proof of contact, yes. (and don't ask because it gives up sensitive info on the guy)
Well work you magic and get Steve working on a damn Matte Screen iMac... Pretty Please....
It's a trademark issue. A big deal in terms of the law. Not a big deal in terms of a dev changing the name in order to avoid legal troubles.
You are right. I guess that is something Steve learned from all the troubles with Apple Corp? Win or loose Apple still had to spend big bucks for Steve's use of someone else's trademarked name.
Even I have to side with Steve Jobs
The guy who wrote the original email is a tool and fanboy with no sense of self worth. He is a hipster who failed at school so instead of trying he dropped out to go to Starbucks everyday, play with iChat and write mac software. I think it's working out for him now
My god, you could not make up your own joke, so stole it from person, who said that to me orginally, even though there are no starbucks in India.
You are a tool
"1) not everyone can afford a mac. It's a premium retail item and priced that way
2) apple doesn't license out their os to everyone and their dog
3) ms relies on ignorance, inertia, and universal licensing. "
1. Please explain to me how 599.00 for a Mac mini is out of the price range of the average consumer. For that matter 999.00 for a MacBook or even 1199.00 or an iMac. What is so premium about those prices? Do you live in a third world country because where I come from people send more then 599.00 eating out in a few weeks.
2. Yes we all know this. Thanks for commenting on it yet again.
3. People use Windows because it dominates the market. Most of us need to use it to get work done. Most of us use it because its what business has adopted as the standard. For someone that is an old XP user you make alot of comments about something you don't even use or know how to use. Its like making of a car you drove 10 years ago. You sound like a retard.
I would really love for you to tell us how Apple most popular systems that cost right around 1000.00 (macbook and macbook pro 13") are so out of the range of the average consumer and so premium. Also explain to me why Apple spends most of its time trying to let users know that overall the cost of ownership is actually less expensive then owning a PC yet you contantly spout this garbage.
firstly I am replying to first number 1, not second number 1......I thought you stated in previous comments that there is no premium market and Apple made that up.
Last number 3, Interesting you say that even though the MS shareholders are not happy with MS 'dominates' the market, i noticed you did not comment in that discussion
*]good but flawed thing my buddy bo
*]apple is a patented name
*]ipod is a patented name
*]apple inc. Admitted its error by paying huge sums of green backs to quiet apple corps
*]apple entered the music biz
*]apple corps sued and won again
yet who can say apple or any words can be patented unless they are used to deceive the buying public into buying a mimic product ,
so apple inc. Should have told apple corps to go f itself , it did not for reasons we all know.
Also since apple corps has allowed apple inc. To function for many yrs. With that name apple corps has implied that apple name is ok for apple inc. To use
the same thinking applies to ipodrip
ipodrip existed as function to rip music from ipod to other device hence the accurate name
i p o d r i p... 78 months go by and apple says no go . Yet apple gave no compensation for ipodrip great timely service to apple and apple clients
well the apple corps should sue the ass off of apple inc. For the same reason
facts are facts ,and facts have to applied to both cases equally
apple received great value from the ripping service
apple inc. Could smile at riaa and say were clean and apple worker;s then would direct people to ipodrip .they directed me dude .
Steve jobs of old would have quietly paid a couple of mill to these great kids who truly love apple and moved on
todays steve or todays apple has changed . Apple today smiles a lot less . Apple today has an almost i want to puke>> slickness. I think celebrity playlist w/ 2 bimbo's was my final straw.
Apple legally was correct
apple sucks in the way it handled its minions
Amen! Einstein couldn't have said it any better!
Amen! Einstein couldn't have said it any better!
even if your goofing on me i am happy someone reads me
my sig is the final true answer !!
peace dude
My god, you could not make up your own joke, so stole it from person, who said that to me orginally, even though there are no starbucks in India.
As I recall there are plenty of Baristas. I wouldn?t be surprised to see Starbucks there soon.
*]Good but flawed thing my buddy bo
*]apple is a patented name
*]ipod is a patented name
*]apple inc. admitted its error by paying huge sums of green backs to quiet apple corps
*]apple entered the music biz
*]apple corps sued and won again
- If you wish to use someone’s else’s name then be prepared to have the fight you for it.
- Apple is not patented.
- There was no “error”. Apple Computers argued that no one could be confused by the two companies because their businesses don’t intersect. At the time that was very true yet they still settled out of court for $80k. 12 years later another settlement for a different issue was settled for $26M.
- iPodRip doesn’t exist without the iPod and is directly created to work with an iPod, yet you feel that they should be able to use the name for free without question? Seriously!
- Apple Corps sued them again long before they entered the “music biz”. They sued them when Macs got MIDI support. A company needs to defend it’s copyrights and trademarks. Not defending them sets a precedence.
- To say Apple Corps sued and won again is erroneous on many levels. The one time it actually went to court and wasn’t just a settlement, Apple Corps lost. Apple tried to pay them $1M to settle, but Apple Corps took it to court claiming it was a breach of contract for using the Apple logo in general even though the store was called iTunes Music Store. Apple Corps lost. The judge said, "“no breach of the trademark agreement had been demonstrated.”
If you have a trademark you have to protect it. If you don’t you set precedence that you don’t care who uses it. You clearly think Apple Corp has a right to protect their trademark but have a problem with Apple Inc. doing the same?.. .. ..
"the only mac apple offers sub-$1000 is the mini. Everything else is $1000 or higher. Apple has virtually nothing in the mid-end and nothing at all oin the low-end. The mid to low end market is much broader. There will be far more consumers in these semgents. The $1000 market is considered the premium end. I dodn't make that up. The industry did. Others in the industry offer $1000+ models as well, but apple, with its $1000+ - only offerings, rules this end. By its very nature, the $1000+ will be limited. It's the top of the retail pyramid, and yes, not everyone will be able to afford a mac at these prices, but among those that can, apple rules this area. Keep in mind that the retail pyramid is much narrower at the top. "
Your first point in your earlier post was most people can not afford a Mac and that simply isn't true. Even if you take out the Mini the Macbook and even the Macbook Pro 13 are easily within most users price range.
"exactly. Ignorance, inertia, apathy."
When someone use the system they need to get a job done I fail to see how that makes them ignorant. In fact 85% of Apple users also use Windows. If yo walk into an Apple store most sales rep will use Bootcamp and the ability to run Windows as a sale pitch. Its okay to like a Mac and prefer to use a Mac but you are so bias to one end anything you say has no merit. If you used Windows and didn't like some feature then at least your opinion would be worth something in this area. Fact is you don't so I'm not sure why you bother bashing something you don't even use.
"As for total cost of ownership. That's lower. But the initial outlay for a mac is on average, higher."
And what I am saying is users will not walk away from a product for a few hundred dollars. That is nothing by todays standards.
firstly I am replying to first number 1, not second number 1......I thought you stated in previous comments that there is no premium market and Apple made that up.
Last number 3, Interesting you say that even though the MS shareholders are not happy with MS 'dominates' the market, i noticed you did not comment in that discussion
I really could care less about MS shareholds seeing I am not one of them. I use a product based on needs not based on an emotional reaction. Also I never stated there is no premium market only that premium is a subjective term. At least if your going to quote me get it right.
- If you wish to use someone?s else?s name then be prepared to have the fight you for it.
- Apple is not patented.
- There was no ?error?. Apple Computers argued that no one could be confused by the two companies because their businesses don?t intersect. At the time that was very true yet they still settled out of court for $80k. 12 years later another settlement for a different issue was settled for $26M.
- iPodRip doesn?t exist without the iPod and is directly created to work with an iPod, yet you feel that they should be able to use the name for free without question? Seriously!
- Apple Corps sued them again long before they entered the ?music biz?. They sued them when Macs got MIDI support. A company needs to defend it?s copyrights and trademarks. Not defending them sets a precedence.
- To say Apple Corps sued and won again is erroneous on many levels. The one time it actually went to court and wasn?t just a settlement, Apple Corps lost. Apple tried to pay them $1M to settle, but Apple Corps took it to court claiming it was a breach of contract for using the Apple logo in general even though the store was called iTunes Music Store. Apple Corps lost. The judge said, "?no breach of the trademark agreement had been demonstrated.?
If you have a trademark you have to protect it. If you don?t you set precedence that you don?t care who uses it. You clearly think Apple Corp has a right to protect their trademark but have a problem with Apple Inc. doing the same?FINE POINTS
i will mull them over pancakes at dinner
9
FINE POINTS
i will mull them over pancakes at dinner
9
Here is a decent yet brief synopsis of Apple Computers v. Apple Corps over the years. I?ve looked it over and saw nothing that seemed out of place or erroneous.
Apple did at one time object to one of New York State's Trademarks.
Hey thanks for that- I always appreciate something interesting to read. My favorite line in the article is "Gwyneth Paltrow better rename that kid quick",.
Here is a decent yet brief synopsis of Apple Computers v. Apple Corps over the years. I’ve looked it over and saw nothing that seemed out of place or erroneous.
Why- were you a court reporter on all the cases over the years? Or are you an established Apple historian?
Based on my reading of the back-and-forth between newbee and teckstud: (i) The attacks seem to go both ways; and (ii) They did not seem unprovoked, in the least (at least, not to me).
Poor teckstud -- he must be quite pleased and relieved to have you, as a fellow New Yorker, stand up for him.
Based on the thousands of postings I've read of his, I think that he seems to be quite content to be dishing it out to everyone else, but has a bit of a thin skin when it comes to being being able to take it. Not unlike a trait I have often seen in my travels to the Big City (which, btw, I happen to think, is the greatest city on earth).
I have a thin skin? Haha. Trust me the personal attacks are much more revealing of the poster than the person being attacked. At least I don't stalk anyone on here, provoke them over and over and post ridiculous comments on their every post. And your whining to the moderators "oh hear my call"- how pathetic is that? Talk about "thin skin".
So now your trying to insult all newyorkers- boohoo. Your probably one of those tourists that gawks at us from your 2 decker bus ride though Manhattan wishing you lived here. And where exactly are you from?
Finally- I thought I was on your ignore list - didn't you get the memo from solipsism. Why are you reading my thousands of posts anyway?